Dear all, I was wondering is someone can help confirm whether my translation (from English into Latin) is correct here.

What I wanted to say is:And so, the Greeks entered the Eastern City and conquered the enemy.

This is what I have come up with.itaque, Graecī intraverunt urbem orientālem et vincevano hostem.

The obvious problem here is the fact that I think vincevano is irregular, from the 2d conj vincere. Also I was again wondering if orientalem could be written as orientalis instead. That way it would read (I think) the city of the East instead of the Eastern city.

Just so you guys know, non of this is homework or anything (I'm 22 lol) just doing it because I like Latin.

"-Vno" is an Italian suffix, "vincevano" is an Italian conjugation. You meant uīcērunt / uīcēre.

Aiming to imitate 1st c. BC Latin, I'd correct your sentence to "Itaque graecī intrāuērunt urbem orientālem et uīcērunt hostēs". It's been often observed that this Latin used "hostis" in the plural when they meant "the enemy" as in an army or a city (instead of a particular person), unlike English where the singular "enemy" can be used for both. I wonder if that was actually obeyed in other times, though...

You could play a lot with the word choice and word order, of course. "Itaque orientālem graecī introiēre urbem hostēsque uīcērunt", etc.

ēlūcet mâiōrem habēre vim ad discenda ista līberam cūriōsitātem quam meticulōsam necessitātemIt is clear that a free curiosity has a greater force in order to learn these things [languages] than a necessity based on fear. (St. Augustine, Cōnfessiōnēs I.14)